Punishments

Yemenat

Ahmed Saif Hashed

Any duty officer or even a passing officer in the college grounds could impose any punishment they desired upon you, including those that felt particularly burdensome. Any officer was deemed credible and their word was indisputable. Even a student from the previous batch, not yet graduated, had the authority to enforce punishments, and you had no choice but to comply without objection or hesitation, for they were the ones in authority without a doubt or suspicion.

The prevailing system relied largely on the principle of seniority, and the saying “execute then discuss” held immense significance in the philosophy of military orders and punishments. Should you wish to protest an action or punishment imposed by someone of a higher rank, it was your responsibility to prove the validity of your claims; for, by default, they were considered truthful while you were presumed to be lying, unless you could substantiate your assertions with undeniable evidence.

Moreover, the running system was the only acceptable manner of movement within the college corridors. Walking or moving slowly in the college’s fields and courtyards was strictly prohibited; you were always required to run. If you faltered, relaxed, or slowed down, punishment would be meted out for violating the college’s regulations. There were no standardized penalties to match the severity of offenses; it was left to the discretion of the one who observed the violation, who would then decide on an appropriate punishment.

As for the punishment referred to as “loss,” I found it particularly unjust, especially as it affected the student’s salary; it did not only impact them but also their family’s sustenance! I detest any punishment that affects the innocent, extends beyond the wrongdoer, or takes away from the livelihood of their children and family.

Today, amid this brutal war, salaries